Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Nysut Lawsuit

Nysut Lawsuit

Ratings: (0)|Views: 7,267|Likes:
NYSUT files suit against 2% property tax cap
NYSUT files suit against 2% property tax cap

More info:

Published by: Michael Gareth Johnson on Feb 20, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

02/20/2013

pdf

text

original

 
STATE
OF
NEW YORKSUPREME COURT COUNTY
OF
ALBANY
NEW YORK STATE UNITED TEACHERS
by its President
RICHARD
C.
IANNUZZI, NAOMI
AVERY,
SETH COHEN,TIMOTHY MICHAEL EHLERS, KATHLEENTOBINFLUSSER,
MICHAEL
LEXIS, ROBERT PEARL
as a Parent,
Individually
and
on
behalf
of his
children
KYLEIGH PEARL, MICAELA PEARL,
AVA
PEARL
and
NOLAN PEARL, BRIAN PICKFORD,
HILARY
STRONG
as a Parent,
Individually
and on behalf
of
her
child
KEVIN STRONG, SUMMONS
Plaintiffs,
Index
No.:
-against-
The STATE
OF
NEW YORK, ANDREW M. CUOMO
as Governor of the State
of New
York,
THOMAS
P.
DiNAPOLI
as
Comptroller
ofthe
State
of New
York,
and
JOHN B. KING,
JR.,as Commissioner of the
New
York
State Education Department.
Plaintiffs
designate
Albany
County
as the place of
trial.
The
basis of venue is
is
defendants'
principal
places of business.Defendants.
To
the above-named Defendants:
YOU
ARE
HEREBY
SUMMONED
to answer the complaint
in
this action and to serve
a
copy
of
your answer on the
plaintiffs'
attorneys
within
twenty (20) days after the service
of
the summons,
exclusive
of
the day of service (or
within
thirty
(30)
days after the service is complete
if
the summons
is
not personally delivered to you
within
the State
of New
York);
and in case
of
your failure
to appear
or
answer, judgment
will
be taken against you by default for the
relief
demanded in the complaint.
Dated:
Latham,
New
York
February
19,
2013
RICHARD
E.
CASAGRANDE
Attorney
for
Plaintiffs
800 Troy-Schenectady
Road
Latham,
New
York
12110(518)213-6000chard
E.
Casagrande
 
STATE
OF NEW
YORK
SUPREME COURT
COUNTY
OF
ALBANY
NEW
YORK
STATEUNITEDTEACHERS
by its
President
RICHARD
C.
IANNUZZI,
NAOMI
AVERY,
SETH
COHEN,
TIMOTHY
MICHAELEHLERS,
KATHLEEN
TOBIN FLUSSER,
MICHAEL LILLIS,
ROBERT
PEARL
as a
Parent,
Individually andon behalf of his children
KYLEIGH
PEARL,
MICAELA
PEARL,
AVA
PEARL
and
NOLAN
PEARL, BRIAN
PICKFORD,
HILARY
STRONG
as a
Parent,
Individually and on behalf
of
her
child
KEVIN
STRONG, VERIFIEDCOMPLAINT
Plaintiffs,
Index
No.:
-against-
Date
Filed:
The
STATE
OF
NEW
YORK,
ANDREW
M.
CUOMO
as Governor
ofthe
State
of
New
York,
THOMAS
P.
DiNAPOLI
as Comptroller
ofthe
State
of New
York,
and
JOHN
B.
KING,
JR.,as Commissioner of the New
York
State
Education
Department.
Defendants.
Plaintiffs
New
York
State
United
Teachers,
by its
president
Richard C. Iannuzzi, Naomi
Avery,
Seth Cohen, Timothy
Michael
Ehlers, Kathleen Tobin Flusser, Michael
Lillis,
Robert Pearl,
individually
and on behalf of his children
Kyleigh,
Micaela, Ava and Nolan Pearl, who are pupils
in
a New
York
school district, Brian
Pickford,
Hilary Strong individually and on behalf
of
her
child
Kevin
Strong, who is a
pupil
in a'New
York
school district, by their
attorney,
Richard
E.
Casagrande,
Esq.
(Matthew E. Bergeron, Esq., Laura R. Hallar, Esq., and Robert T.
Reilly,
Esq., of Counsel),for their complaint
against
defendants
respectfully allege, upon information and belief, as follows:1
 
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
1.
Plaintiffs
are school district voters, residents, and taxpayers, as
well
as
parents
of
children
who are New
York
State
public school district
students.
Plaintiffs
support - and their
children
would
benefit from - enhanced educational funding for their school districts.
Plaintiff
NYSUT
represents
over 600,000 in-service and retired
public
and private employees,
including
morethan 98% of
New
York's
public school
teachers
and a majority of other public school employees,
including
guidance counselors, nurses, teaching assistants, aides, school secretaries, and bus drivers,among others. The overwhelming
majority
of
NYSUT
members are
state
residents and taxpayers,and many have children who attend New
York's
public schools.
2.
Plaintiffs
bring this declaratory
j
udgment action seeking to declare unconstitutionalthe so-called "tax cap" legislation enacted in
2011,
as it applies to public school districts.
3.
The tax cap places an undemocratic and unconstitutional
supermaj
ority
requirement
on
votes for school
budgets
seeking
to
increase the school
funding
tax
levy
by more
that
2% or the
rate
of
inflation,
whichever is less. The
apparent
purpose and practical effect of the tax cap is to
limit
the
ability
of school boards and school district voters to increase school funding beyond
that
permitted under the tax cap, and to
deter
efforts to exceed the tax cap.4. The tax cap has the effect
of
perpetuating and widening the existing gross education
funding
inequities between school districts. As a result, the tax cap has a particularly negativeimpact
on
the
State's
poor and minority school
children,
denying them the educational opportunities
provided
by other, wealthier
districts,
and denying
all
local
school
boards and their voters
ofthe
rightto close existing funding and achievement gaps, or to provide enhanced educational opportunitiesto school children.
2

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->